By choosing to post the reply below you agree to the rules you agreed to when joining Sailnet.
Click Here to view those rules.

Message:

Trackback:

Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :

Post Icons

You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:

No icon

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register. Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.

User Name:

Password

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:

Confirm Password:

Email Address

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:

Log-in

User Name

Remember Me?

Password

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.

Click here to view the posting rules you are bound to when clicking the'Submit Reply' button below

Additional Options

Miscellaneous Options

Automatically parse links in text

Automatically embed media (requires automatic parsing of links in text to be on).

Automatically retrieve titles from external links

Click here to view the posting rules you are bound to when clicking the'Submit Reply' button below

Topic Review (Newest First)

05-13-2013 09:57 PM

L124C

Re: AC 72 crashes, 1 dead

As I recall, the air tanks were provided from the begining on the 72's.
This video was shot after AC 17 pitch poled, and it shows they were certainly not being cavalier about safety. One of the sailors says; "We were fortunate no one was hurt this time. We can't assume that will always be the case".
Another says: "The drills were fun, but were also sobering. They drive home that what we do is pretty dangerous".

My point seems to be misunderstood. I'm not suggesting that they engineer a boat that won't pitch pole. I would insist that they engineer one that would not do so catastrophically, therefore, reducing its potential to kill someone. Air bags, crush zones, better gas mileage, etc, were only engineered upon insistence. Someone pushed back on each as unnecessary or impossible.

It seems that the problem with the Artemis boat is that it did self destruct catastrophically.
I think examination will determine that it had structural defiances.
The 45's pitch poled on a regular basis, and usually could sail away from the incident. Most that didn't were repaired and ready to sail the next day. Check out the video link below which is a compilation of 45 and 72 cat capsizes (I suggest mute to avoid the irritating music!). The Oracle 72 (AC 17) capsize is 5 minutes into the video.
AC 17 seemed to basically survive it's pitch pole (in stronger conditions than the Artemis incident), only to have the wing destroyed after it sank in the strong current. One of the hulls ruptured after hours of having powerful boats tugging on it, attempting to recover the cat, as it drifted out the Gate in a strong ebb tide. No one was hurt in any of those incidents to my knowledge.
If you look at the videos, the hulls are completely vertical and almost motionless for a while as sailors cling to the net like spiders. Then, sometimes someone looses their grip and goes swimming (or goes through the wing!). The incidents actually appear rather graceful, becuause the boats de-power so quickly. After the capsize, the only parts of the boat in the water are one hull, and the top of the wing. With the exception of the "Muscat" capsize 20 seconds into the video...MAN that was ugly!
It's speculation at this point, but it seems to me the Artemis boat probably never got close to vertical, but simply started coming apart, possibly while still moving at a good clip, creating a lot of debris in the water for Simpson to get trapped under.

I would ask the same. I don't recall name calling or making snide comments as you've seen to. Sorry if we see things differently, I suspect we often will. Hard to assess emotions in a post, but easy to read name calling.

Truce.

Agreed...Truce Margaritas forever

05-13-2013 12:08 PM

Minnewaska

Re: AC 72 crashes, 1 dead

Quote:

Originally Posted by chef2sail

An emotional outburst followed by a personal chiding , ridiculing, or lecturing...getting to be the norm Minnie. Your replies to me in posts seem personal as of late and not necessary. Please refrain

....

I would ask the same. I don't recall name calling or making snide comments as you've seen to. Sorry if we see things differently, I suspect we often will. Hard to assess emotions in a post, but easy to read name calling.

Truce.

05-13-2013 10:16 AM

chef2sail

Re: AC 72 crashes, 1 dead

Interesting article from Oracles first crash posted on SA. Evidently the practice man overboard and emergency procedures quite a lot

Are you kidding me? Name calling those that would suggest it should be safer? Someone lost their loved one to a sport that didn't give him any choice whatsoever. This is evidenced by all those that are so enamored by the idea of being aboard an AC racer and going fast, they would accept whatever risk presented. Give his family a call and let them know you think we're namby pambys, if you have the power of your conviction.

Yes, it should be safer. That doesn't require an absolute. I fully reject that the paid crew has any more choice than a factory worker in a dangerous factory. These men aspire to be AC racing crew and have no choice but to accept whatever risk the previous winner decides the next race is going to take. Mitigating this risk to a level where it's not so obvious that people with continue to be hurt or killed is human. There is no need to return to genteel days to do it.

'm sure you did your NASCAR laps without a helmet or any other safety features, because you're no namby pamby.

An emotional outburst followed by a personal chiding , ridiculing, or lecturing...getting to be the norm Minnie. Your replies to me in posts seem personal as of late and not necessary. Please refrain

I haven't seen anyone of the AC racers or crews calling for any mega increased safety measures or blame the sport for the lack thereof. The factory worker analogy doesn't make sense. The Skippers and trimmers are compensated at over six figures from what I have been led to believe. That doesn't really make a difference on Safety really. It is inherently a dangerous venture

That doesn't mean I said to ignore the subject. It is an dangerous sport and greater risks are assumed if one participates. Loads on sails, speed pushing to the limit are art of this.

You illustration of going for NO safety measures is a bit of an overreaction to my post.

I didn't say go without helmets or that no safety measures should be employed and used. Of course they should. They should make the AC racers as safe as possible and employee all current measures to do that.
An illustration of that is just what they have done having them wear the extra oxygen which was a results of what they learned in a previous crash. I believed they are committed to continually improve personal safety. In NASCAR it took them years to use the HANS device and employ safer barriers. It took years to used safer fuel cells, roof flaps to prevent rollovers and restrictor plates at the Superspeedways/

This is an evolving sport and boat testing the limits is not unlike other sports doing the same It is the cutting edge of its technology and innovations as well as safety may be spun off of it just as it is in NASCAR cars.

While I too appreciate the beauty of the older mono-hulls and have sailed on Australia II in Maui, Stars and Stripes in both San Diego and in Narraganset Bay, I know that the AC races have utilized many differing formulas for their competition dating back many years, Changing the Americas Cup calling for it to go back to the genteel days of the 12 meter boats will not stop the continued development of these super cats.

As I mentioned before in this and other posts where there was a loss of life, human life is precious. A member of our sailing community even closer to home.

God bless Andrew Simpson and his family. May he find fair winds and following seas in heaven

05-13-2013 07:23 AM

Minnewaska

Re: AC 72 crashes, 1 dead

Quote:

Originally Posted by chef2sail

....Listening to the Mamby Pambys trying to make it safer is not the point......

Are you kidding me? Name calling those that would suggest it should be safer? Someone lost their loved one to a sport that didn't give him any choice whatsoever. This is evidenced by all those that are so enamored by the idea of being aboard an AC racer and going fast, they would accept whatever risk presented. Give his family a call and let them know you think we're namby pambys, if you have the power of your conviction.

Yes, it should be safer. That doesn't require an absolute. I fully reject that the paid crew has any more choice than a factory worker in a dangerous factory. These men aspire to be AC racing crew and have no choice but to accept whatever risk the previous winner decides the next race is going to take. Mitigating this risk to a level where it's not so obvious that people with continue to be hurt or killed is human. There is no need to return to genteel days to do it.

I'm sure you did your NASCAR laps without a helmet or any other safety features, because you're no namby pamby.

05-13-2013 03:13 AM

chef2sail

Re: AC 72 crashes, 1 dead

Quote:

Originally Posted by L124C

Was Mr. Ellis not aware someone could be injured or killed when he signed up? Simpson's odds of being killed driving to the practice were probably much higher than being killed during it. Yet, most of us drive. It's cliché, but I think it needs to be said to keep things in perspective.
Give me the action and athleticism of the current format anytime over the "romance". I'd bet almost every AC sailor would agree. If left to Ellis's "team", I'm guessing they stay in .
Even knowing the risks, how many of us wouldn't jump at the offer to take the guest spot on the AC boats? I for one, wouldn't hesitate!
I save my romantic sentiments for my 40 year old mono hull and the Master Mariner regatta every year. I think our sport needs something exciting to watch, with cutting edge technology. The current format certainly qualifies, and yes...includes some risk. What worth doing doesn't? Well...I guess you could stay home and read War and Peace, but....

I totally agree.

If offered a ride, I would sign up in a minute. I am an adult and know the consequences. It is about speed, not necessarily wanting to see something macabre happen.

I Had the opportunity to drive a real Sprint Cup NASCAR on Charlotte Motor Speedway by myself and averaged laps of 160 for 20 minutes. Its all about the speed. That's the fascination.

The AC 72 is all about speed and tactics and state of the art design. Cutting edge. So what if it is a somewhat extreme sport other than the genteel days of old.

Listening to the Mamby Pambys trying to make it safer is not the point. You can only make gliders safer to a point. Maybe they should out law them? You can only make hot air balloons so safe, maybe they should be out lawed. How about base jumping.

These are adults making informed consent decisions.

Its sad the man died. Died doing what he loved.

05-12-2013 05:26 PM

Minnewaska

Re: AC 72 crashes, 1 dead

My point seems to be misunderstood. I'm not suggesting that they engineer a boat that won't pitchpole. I would insist that they engineer one that would not do so catastrophically, therefore, reducing its potential to kill someone. Air bags, crush zones, better gas mileage, etc, were only engineered upon insistence. Someone pushed back on each as unnecessary or impossible.

05-12-2013 03:32 PM

pdqaltair

Re: AC 72 crashes, 1 dead

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minnewaska

There needs to be something that will prevent a catastrophic event like pitchpoling a cat doing 40 kts with crew that will be tossed like a tissue box in a car crash.

Its possible that the boat should be designed to self destruct and absorb the energy, like cars essentially do today. See if Ellison has enough money to agree to that.

a. Yes, you can do things to make pitch poling difficult. Slow down to monohull speeds. The reality is that this sort of racing will always push to the limit; if we make the hulls better... then we add more sail! So in performance mutihull sailing it will ALWAYS be possible. Unlike ballasted monos, they do not simply lean over.

b. The second paragraph makes no sense at all without explanation. Flying off a capsizing multi is exhilarating, but 95% of the time it is safer than staying.

c. Monos can pitch pole also, if high performance. I've seen it many times. If you built a planing 40-knot-in-20-knot-breeze mono I'm betting she would be a dangerous handful. It isn't a mono-multi issue, it's the power to weight and the no-limits philosophy.

In my mind, if they are not going to be free to build some thing crazy fast, there are other slow sailing venues.

This thread has more than 10 replies.
Click here to review the whole thread.